Funny, they violated a contract to fund worker's pensions and provide for their old age & future and you give overpaid management a complete pass ?? Yep, you're still a complete troll ASS !!The raise for the CEO was one of many for management, if you're playing stupid, good "job".

Asked and answered. Next.

You mean a 300% CEO raise that was later backed down? Hostess lost $341 million in 2011, CEO pay was $1.5 million of that. They probably should have paid more and gotten a better CEO. Maybe then they would still be in business. Your percentages in a vacuum are pretty poor arguments.

<quoted text>Asked and answered. Next.You mean a 300% CEO raise that was later backed down? Hostess lost $341 million in 2011, CEO pay was $1.5 million of that. They probably should have paid more and gotten a better CEO. Maybe then they would still be in business. Your percentages in a vacuum are pretty poor arguments.Next question?

Actually, you've answered nothing. Try to explain why management took wages from workers to fund their pensions and spent it....

Looks to me like Hostess' unions stole their workers livelihoods and their pensions with inefficient work rules, and turning down the bankruptcy court's offer.

Nice work rules, inefficient, bloated, and outdated.

Hostess' union rules:No truck could carry both bread and snacks even when going to the same locationDrivers were not permitted to load their own trucksWorkers who loaded bread were not allowed to also load snacksBringing products from back rooms to shelves required another set of union employeesMulti-Employer pension obligations made Hostess liable for other, previously bankrupted, retirement plan contributions from employees that never worked for Hostess at all

Looks to me like Hostess' unions stole their workers livelihoods and their pensions with inefficient work rules, and turning down the bankruptcy court's offer.Nice work rules, inefficient, bloated, and outdated.Hostess' union rules:No truck could carry both bread and snacks even when going to the same locationDrivers were not permitted to load their own trucksWorkers who loaded bread were not allowed to also load snacksBringing products from back rooms to shelves required another set of union employeesMulti-Employer pension obligations made Hostess liable for other, previously bankrupted, retirement plan contributions from employees that never worked for Hostess at all

What kinda idiot management agreed to these rules ?? Oh right, the useless kind, that DECIDED ON THEM....

Next you will try to tell us the management encouraged the union to turn down the contract in bankruptcy. Nice victim mentality the unions and their minions have, can't even see their own self-inflicted wounds.

Come on, why should ANY American worker work without the pay agreed to.... being PAID ????How many paychecks did management get shorted, again ???

Please tell us all how many paychecks the union was shorted. Oh, that is right, you are making irrelevant comparisons again, something you seem to have quite the penchant for.

Did the bakers' union kill off the reorganizational bankruptcy or not? The answer is yes, the bakers' union forced the company into liquidation instead of reorganization. Self inflicted wounds by the union again.

Hostess Brands acknowledged for the first time in a news report Monday that the company diverted workers' pension money for other company uses.

The bankrupt baker told The Wall Street Journal that money taken out of workers' paychecks, intended for their retirement funds, was used for company operations instead. Hostess, which was under different management at the time the diversions began in August 2011, said it does not know how much money it took.

For you to have a point, Hostess would be the only job in the world, right small troll ?

Hostess Brands acknowledged for the first time in a news report Monday that the company diverted workers' pension money for other company uses.

The bankrupt baker told The Wall Street Journal that money taken out of workers' paychecks, intended for their retirement funds, was used for company operations instead. Hostess, which was under different management at the time the diversions began in August 2011, said it does not know how much money it took.

Hostess Brands acknowledged for the first time in a news report Monday that the company diverted workers' pension money for other company uses.

The bankrupt baker told The Wall Street Journal that money taken out of workers' paychecks, intended for their retirement funds, was used for company operations instead. Hostess, which was under different management at the time the diversions began in August 2011, said it does not know how much money it took.

<quoted text>Next you will try to tell us the management encouraged the union to turn down the contract in bankruptcy. Nice victim mentality the unions and their minions have, can't even see their own self-inflicted wounds.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.